Ansys-workbench

[elogesh]

Hai,

We have ansys8.1 Ansys classic as well as Ansys-workbench design simulation module.

We use Pro-E for CAD model preparation.

Now-a-days, I do analysis using Ansys work bench module.But repairing the model with out design modeler is seems to be difficult job.Spliting of surfaces for applying loads and constraints,etc.Combining small surfaces into big surface which improves mesh quality.

But fortunately , I have Pro-Mechanica. Eventhough I don't know much about working in Pro-Mechanica, I can able to do splitting in Pro-Mechnica, which is transferred sucessfully into Workbench also. But I don't know how to combine small surface into big surface. This is especially for improving the mesh qulaity. Now the queries are,

1) Whether it is possible to do Combining surface in Design modeler?
2) Whether the design modeler is a must we have to acquire for future versions of Ansys?
3) About the mesh convergence, I find it difficult compared to ansys classic? what is about your opinion?

But on comparison Ansy-WB is better than Ansys-classic on file size and lot more.

Looking forware for your replies about the queries......

Regards,
Logesh.E

 

[Drej]

Firstly, 8.1 is not called "classic" anymore, that tag was used and, quite appropriately, removed quickly at version 8. We now have ANSYS and ANSYS Workbench.

> 1) Whether it is possible to do Combining surface in Design modeler?

You can do this in Workbench, see "Virtual Cell" in the help file.

>2) Whether the design modeler is a must we have to acquire for future versions of Ansys?

Depends on your current/future projects and in particular modelling and geometry requirements. If you use consistently use geometry which requires chopping up etc. then you'd consider buying into a modeller license.

>3) About the mesh convergence, I find it difficult compared to ansys classic? what is about your opinion?

Mesh convergence is a piece of cake to employ in WB. In ANSYS, because it's considered to be a more high-level code (in the sense that you must "nanny" the model through - this is a good thing I must add, as in WB a lot of operations run in the background without the knowlegde of the user), then mesh convergence is a more explicit process and a "manual" mesh converegence operation is needed. This is not as bad a drawback as it stands, since you have total control over the mesh and, more importantly, the analysis itself.

>But on comparison Ansy-WB is better than Ansys-classic on file size and lot more.

This is a very sweeping statement, which I disagree with as it stands. First of all, file sizes in ANSYS are as big/small as you want them to be. In ANSYS, you explicitly have enormous control over this. As a long term user of ANSYS, I prefer to use this to model with, especially when the modelling becomes relatively "complex" - ANSYS gives me more control. There is the pre-processing command builder within WB to do this, but its not always possible to get direct feedback from your model in WB regarding the builder commands i.e. producing listings etc. WB has limits as to the level of model you can produce, and the best thing about WB in my opinion is the GUI. I only use WB if the model is 'simple' and straightforward and I know that I won't have to worry about converegence issues etc. and the little WB quirks. WB is absolutely fantastic in terms of its integration with 3D CAD systems, which seamlessly link with WB. What is key to remember about WB is that it is called a "Simulation" module, which gives you some idea of its capability in terms of FE. As WB develops more and more, and each year it makes tremendous leaps forward, I see it being a much more capable FE package in line with ANSYS itself, but currently WB still has a lot of catching up to do to convince long term ANSYS users.

-- drej --